Garry Kasparov Shared His Opinion on the Candidates Tournament

Время публикации: 05.04.2013 19:14 | Последнее обновление: 06.04.2013 22:13

Garry Kasparov shared his opinion on the Candidates tournament on Crestbook.com:

"The tournament proved that the rumors stating that the classical chess is dead are exaggerated. There was a spectacular event, a lot of decisive games and so on.

Yes, the tournament turned out to be remarkable, but I'm not sure it was the best tournament in history. There were good tournaments earlier too - for instance Las Palmas 1997. If comparing the major events then perhaps there weren't that many. I can compare the Candidates tournament of 1959 to the one held in London this year.

The participants' list there wasn't that balanced though. Now in London only Radjabov was the outsider, but back then there were more weak players.        

The Regulation of the tournament was just terrible. Who made those rules? The challenger can't be chosen by the tie-break! Why the number of wins became more important than the Sonneborn-Berger score? It's absolutely necessary to arrange a match with the normal time control between first two prize-winners even if they didn't tie but one has surpassed another not more than by a point only. Only if this match finishes in a draw the tie-break should be taken into consideration.

The tournament showed Carlsen's weaknesses. I mean his openings and the ability to play the decisive games. For instance, he was playing a  life-and-death game in the last round and he lost it. He was lucky that his competitor has also lost.

Whom has Carlsen defeated in this competition? Only the bottom of the table, while he played pretty unconvincingly with the strong opponents.

His style is also not ideal yet. For example in his last round game against Svidler he played 30.Bh4 instead of 30.Bh8!. But that is a different level and Magnus doesn't play like that yet.

Anand is an experienced fighter, he is able to play the match solidly but still if Carlsen will work and eliminate his weaknesses he will surely win. That's because at the moment he plays chess better than Anand. By the way, Kramnik also plays stronger than Anand.

I'm hardly Kramnik's devoted supporter, but he really played brilliantly. This was one of the best tournaments in his career.

Ivanchuk showed he is a warrior which is not surprising at all. He is a first class chess player. For instance, Gelfand and Topalov aren't such. Aronian is close to that but yet he hasn't entered that caste. 

Ivanchuk continues the tradition of the outstanding players who didn't become world champions, such were Keres, Korchnoi. Moreover, he even surpasses them in certain components as he for instance, overtook me and Karpov in the tournaments, while those mentioned before haven't outstripped the star players of those times.  

In the last round Ivanchuk was fighting for his honor, his entire career. Kramnik didn't understand that.

As regards to his time troubles that's a question to FIDE. One can't change the time controls in the major events just like that. Moving from the time control with the increment to the classical control was fatal for Ivanchuk. That has also become a problem for Grischuk. Otherwise they both would show a better result.

Grischuk was well prepared. He had a huge advantage in the Berlin against Kramnik and in the game against Carlsen in the second cycle. If taking into account the positions he had, Grischuk could win 2-0 against Svidler. I have analysed the knight sacrifice on c4 in the King's Indian in 90s. Black is even better there. Then I showed that sacrifice to Nakamura, but he hadn't a chance to play it. 

Aronian failed to stand the fighting atmosphere. It seems that Levon kind of cracked already in the 7th round when he couldn't convert his promising position against Grischuk into a point, while Carlsen managed to miracuolously escape Radjabov. Then it all just messed up.

Svidler was good.

In general the tournament showed who is who."


  


Смотрите также...